argh argh argh

OK guys. I just don't understand. All these myths of Quetzal, cobra-like, climbing up a tree, clinging like a liana, planting a "parent tree" in front of his little palace, and no one believes that the inhumi are at all related to the vanished gods, the trees? I can't convince you anymore. I've cited and cited. I've explained how the inhumi evolved from the vines plaguing the trees sent to terraform the green moon. Of course Quetzal is like those serpent like lianas - his mamma might even be on the tree he planted - a vine or something that either came up with the lander, or in the words of Juganu, boarded on the red sun whorl in the past since "(ihumi) are everywhere!" Whatever. The fruit is the blood that changes them, gives them knowledge, and affects their offspring. They recombine with the fruit. Of course, once again we have blood equated with vegetable matter, as I've been arguing. Re-read the Short Sun books, please. I don't understand how you can argue with sentient trees. It is in like every chapter. Please. Please. I'll try to avoid repeating myself. Have a nice day. Even if you don't believe in time travel or polyploidy, those trees are not only alive but sentient and doing weird things and inextricably linked to the inhumi and the vanished people. And Horn's abilities --- "walk through brush" magic? !!! give me a break! Marc Aramini

That Subject: line sounds like a pirate trio, eh?

Whoa, hee-haw, hold on there boyo! Y're making far too sweeping a statement here. I believe that most of the list would concede that Wolfe intends us to recognize that the trees possess some very, very weird properties, and that the inhumi have some kind of relationship to them. You've inferred/intuited/iumped to a whole lot of conclusions about the nature of that relationship (including your idea that the "vanished gods" -- or was it the VP? -- became the trees). And some of your ideas seem (to me) more palatable/plausible/probable as I mull them over, live with them, and in particular as I last reread the SS books with them in mind. Some of them have seemed less so, but I (at least) do not feel prepared to dismiss any of your conclusions out of hand. When RttW came out, a number of listmembers reacted to it with what I perceived as undue haste and hostility. I said at the time that I believed it would take time for the books to sink in, that judging a Wolfe book on the basis of a single reading seemed to me like a bad idea. (No, I'm not quoting exact words here.) The book came out what, a year and a half ago? No time at all. NS still yields new insights every time we dig into it; Wolfe wrote SS with nearly twenty years' additional practice in craft under his belt; I don't suppose we can reasonably expect it to be less, well, crafty. I suggest only that your attachment to these ideas is as premature as rejecting them outright. I don't believe we even have the beginnings of a solid handle on the SS books yet.